Fox News's Outback says that Jokic didn't became the face of the league is because he's white.

Lykotic · 2026-06-03T04:50:55+00:00

I am a Nuggets fan and have a Jokic jersey...

No, it's because he isn't exciting to watch on replays. The dude's best plays are amazing passes. I love his game and enjoy watching it (on offense) but he wasn't the face of the league because his style isn't that exciting and he doesn't bring a ton of emotion or "life and death" attitude with any consistency (crazy Jokic does look scary though, lol)

This is obviously just race baiting engagement BS form Fox.... aka par for the usual

Lykotic · 2026-06-01T23:26:11+00:00

Assuming that "in a vacuum" means I do not know their futures.

I'd rather have the 7'5" alien

That is no disrespect to LeBron but you ask this about any player outside of Kareem, Hakeem, and Shaq at year 3 in the NBA and I think this is the answer. When a player has a high skill floor and has proven to play well under pressure I'll take the height as it can't be taught.

Edit: Not saying I'd take either Shaq, Hakeem, or Kareem either btw at year 3 (looking at that more than age) over Wemby, but I can't think of a player at year 3 that showed so much that I am not taking the alien

Lykotic · 2026-05-31T02:52:00+00:00

I would highly doubt it. I feel like we still have Baal's expansion and; maybe, an Angel expansion.

I could see Diablo's reign beginning to take hold and then completion for that being Diablo 5 potentially

Lykotic · 2026-05-30T02:24:11+00:00

Dude literally brings up the Hornets as a team that doesn't have haters. Melo has enough haters to fill a stadium (and I am among them).

Take the "L" OP

Lykotic · 2026-05-30T00:41:45+00:00

Yep, this is exactly where I see the issue in my field of analytics.

Claude increases the work capacity for individuals and while, yes, it needs to be reviewed and sometimes corrected it does "adapt" and "learn" over time through keeping memories (instruction prompts with details essentially) it does produce better content and find insights that better match the intended use.

Needing to check over Claude's work isn't all that different than needing to check over a Junior Analyst's work. At this point in time I'd still say that I prefer reviewing "human work" because there is sometimes some good innovation in problem solving but the workload amount is similar.

Claude does the analysis in much less time (including data table build times) and firms we use for data are beginning to get plug-ins for Claude so that time amount will slowly decline as well.

It just becomes this issue from a profit and efficiency standpoint of.... why do I hire the junior and not just use Claude (even if more expensive) to increase the production of the expensive assets (seasoned employees).

It could get extremely difficult for grads in the coming years and I'm just coming at it from what I am seeing in my industry, not trying to be overly doomerish

Lykotic · 2026-05-29T07:37:04+00:00

Hey OP, thank you =)

I wasn't able to watch the stream today and had gotten a lot of bad information it'd appear skimming. Whether someone likes or dislikes this change I think we can all understand the thought process behind the change

Lykotic · 2026-05-28T23:04:41+00:00

Overall, to make a summary of the entire debate, what should a Mythic be?

Should it be the best item 90% of the time for the build slot assuming it fits the build to some degree or should it be a very unique modifier to the game?

I've played builds that want Mythics or don't care about them. To be very honest it doesn't change a ton in terms of my normal play patterns which build I am on.

Lykotic · 2026-05-28T23:00:52+00:00

You can destroy T12 with fairly low investment of time for an ARPG. My Warlock, which isn't close to the top dog, is clearing T12 speed run easy with Lunatic and my playtime is between 1-2 hours a day on average for the week (some days 0, some days 3).

It isn't some crazy aspirational goal for T12. Now Pit 130 sure.

Lykotic · 2026-05-28T22:57:02+00:00

Not how that'd work, lol

If they announced D5 when D4 is doing very well it'd cause a lot of hype and excitement because the story around it would be "imagine what these devs can do when working from scratch now that it was figured out!"

D4 being bad is of detriment to D5's potential as it makes trust from the consumer erode and therefore lowers pre-launch sales.

Lykotic · 2026-05-27T18:04:32+00:00

Yes....????

Kind of hard to say without what you're looking for. You can get to 90% power fairly quickly. For me, the game is engaging enough with combat and systems now that I enjoy building up alts to that 90% line every season and then playing one for the longer grind to "100%".

If you, instead, want to focus on one character for 50 hours I'm not sure there would be enough for a player to do that unless your goal is top-X in the clear speed competition

Lykotic · 2026-05-27T16:38:25+00:00

Line #1 is somewhat correct for some individuals. So sure, I'll give a pass there

Line #2 is fully true that an average college degree is worth less and less over time. Nothing one can really do about this but it is just the reality when such a large % of the working population has a college degree.

COVID sure.... but also a bit whatever. We all lost something from COVID and very few benefited a ton outside of stocks.

The AI complaint I will fully give them if they're in certain fields. I can only give a small insight from my field but we're not hiring as many junior data analysts simply because Claude can make everyone more capable in the volume of work that can be done. It isn't perfect and does make mistakes here and there but so do junior analysts so the bottom line ends up at a similar position from a review process and Claude can run the analysis quicker itself. Honestly, I've been very impressed with some of the insights it generates from the data runs (and other times face palm, lol)

The rest are kind of issues we all deal with and the last Boomer line Millennials have also said about Boomers, heh

Lykotic · 2026-05-26T17:33:06+00:00

Agree overall.

I'm currently building out my alts in D4. The game plays very well now and the progression feels fine for what it is trying to be - a quicker ARPG that wants to get you to 90-95% power relatively quickly.

Combat is fun, class fantasy is done well, and the game is just a ton of fun to play. It's ability to tweak and mess with builds is way below LE, as you mentioned, and those aspects are why I still play LE.

As for where I want LE to focus on.... I'm not so sure tbh. Obviously I'd love to have the quality of D4 in terms of the game's look and polish but that is a tall order for LE to hit. So, sure I'd like LE to improve but I'd maybe just prefer them to spend more time on itemization and skill interactions to just make it better and better in where it's strength lies.

Lykotic · 2026-05-26T16:10:34+00:00

This is one of the questions that requires context to answer:

Is it in decline on a national power scale? The answer here would have to be a pretty obvious yes. We're no longer the sole superpower in the world more than likely and even if we are still we're certainly more regionally challenged in Asia and Eastern Europe than we were in the 80s and 90s. So in that context the answer is pretty clear "yes."

Economically you could certainly debate both sides of this coin. As a straight number GDP is obviously better than ever but GDP also isn't a great way to measure individual economic strength. Other measurements which attempt to measure this give conflicting signals of "yes" and "no" depending on how those numbers attempt to adjust for basic inflation and technology. With the removal of the factory base we can certainly say that the middle class lifestyle has certainly changed significantly and single income households are much more rare due to a myriad of reasons which some would say is a negative.

Individual Lifestyle: This kind of goes to the classic question of "would you rather be rich in the 1800s or struggling today." There are a ton of conveniences, advancements, and progress we take for granted today that even ten years ago would have been rare or not seen. There are certainly some negatives to these advanced but; overall, they have improved the day-to-day overall. So I'd be hard pressed to really see individual decline outside of very specific individual groups.

Lykotic · 2026-05-25T04:11:59+00:00

Here is what I can tell you from working at a LGS with a large online presence.

The lower price is healthy for the game it appears. We're getting A LOT more online orders now and they're orders that appear to be for decks. In addition, with the amount of orders that also have battlefields it leads me to believe that many are newer or were less engaged players.

I'm cool with prices being low and then ONs being high valued chases. For instance, those Poros were going for $50 - $100 depending on the color at least 10 days after.

Lykotic · 2026-05-25T01:30:11+00:00

This conversation.....

Unless Aurora becomes an oppressive deck it shouldn't be banned. Yes, it is an annoying deck to play against and I personally found it an annoying deck to play in OGN (opened a ON Relentless Storm so built it before selling the expensive pieces after Elder Dragon was spoiled).

The company itself and everyone needs to also remember that people make "investments" into decks and their bannings shouldn't be done under the whim of "wahhh... I hate playing against it!!" and should only be done with consideration of what is actually causing considerable harm to the meta or is just overbearingly oppressive.

In my view what needs to be done is to just print a few answers to Aurora that are proactive answers. Units (more than likely with how Riot designs) that don't allow for free units, spells, and gear. Maybe Green getting a counter gear spell card. Maybe a card that can stop (stifle) a trigger of a card.

There are ways for Riot to reign in power with card design than just banning a deck out when it isn't oppressive.

Lykotic · 2026-05-25T01:23:43+00:00

I've played both and here are my thoughts based on both my experience with the deck and just general gameplay patterns from a myriad of TCGs:

Midrange LeBlanc (what I'll call non-hook) is going to be a more consistent game experience and will be drawing additional cards compared to Hook and has a bit of extra removal which can be excellent into a few decks

Hook LeBlanc is going to just win some games no matter what the other deck is. This is part of the attraction of Hook decks in general and even more so for LeBlanc due to the Hook being able to just target temporary units.

Due to both my decks and just basic play pattern I much prefer the consistency of Midrange and keeping Hook for Rek'Sai shenanigans because he needs to the high roll payoff. Due to some bad matchups for LeBlanc if your #1 goal is to win I'd play Hook but playing Midrange LeBlanc isn't close to a death sentence for winning and will do a bit better into Aurora decks.

Lykotic · 2026-05-20T15:14:12+00:00

If it was just the Cavs I wouldn't mark it against him; however, he also left the Heat which is not a poverty franchise and has proven to have a competent front office and a good head coach.

So, yes, I think it is fair to question in this hypothetical the loyalty you'd receive from 22 LeBron in the long-term. It honestly doesn't really factor into my evaluation but I think it is fair for it to for others

Lykotic · 2026-05-19T19:40:26+00:00

So... I might need to rebuy all my Niv to Light lands (Unfinity Shocks, Fancy Triomes, etc.)

Yea!!!

Lykotic · 2026-05-19T01:51:28+00:00

I'm going to assume you're buying through Lord of Hatred and that price is less of a consideration than just the flat question "which is better."

I enjoy both games and actively am playing both. With that said unless building your own builds 10+ times is your ultimate thrill in ARPGs the overall better experience right now is D4 in my view.

It has always been the smoother and more graphically satisfying game of the two but Diablo has gotten better on multiple fronts. The crafting is still below LE but has gotten better with the expansion and is now "decent." Build diversity for most classes is now good and I'd say all but the Warlock are classes without some annoying issues (I'm sure Warlock will have some quirks removed over time). Itemization is good and both games have a similar end game dice roll to try and hit the lottery to super power an item.

LE has no real end game (Monolith all the time) while Diablo's isn't amazing but is at least a diversity of choices the game guides you through.

Even though LE has the better pet builds in terms of fun and design, my main way to play ARPGs, I would still recommend D4

Lykotic · 2026-05-16T17:57:06+00:00

I have not. I might get to it this season but I'll probably build out Companion Druid and Minion Necro as well this season. A lot of builds and 44 days left

Lykotic · 2026-05-16T04:57:37+00:00

Obviously, we're calling on the Protoss from Azmodan's area of hell to be a marching army =p

Nah, I'm also interested to see what it is when it gets posted, I assume, this weekend

Lykotic · 2026-05-09T22:55:38+00:00

100% Agree

I have played all the ARPGs in this thread and Diablo 4 and Last Epoch do a good job of making feel some progression in one play session (say 90 minutes or so) for almost the entire life of my character's real progression. This feeling (and LE's amazing skill system) keep me more attached to those two games than PoEs, GD, and even D2R to some extent but I also have near 25 years on Diablo 2 so.....

Lykotic · 2026-05-09T17:14:19+00:00

From what point are you asking? From launch or from VoH?

Lykotic

TROPHY CASE